Intel Demos 8-Core, 528-Thread PIUMA Chip with 1 TB/s Silicon Photonics

41

Intel

(Image credit: Intel)
TOPICS
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • Kamen Rider Blade
    What I'm more surprised is that Intel didn't do this on their own internal fabs.

    Why did they need to use TSMC for this?

    Also, a "Custom RISC" architecture vs a derivative off of x86, hmmm.
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    Kamen Rider Blade said:
    Also, a "Custom RISC" architecture vs a derivative off of x86, hmmm.
    If you are going to build an application-specific (graph analysis) CPU with 66 hardware threads per core, you likely don't want a complex instruction decoder bottlenecking the whole thing and adding a handful of cycles latency penalty to every branch prediction miss and every hardware thread switch.

    Kind of a similar story to CPU vs GPU cores.

    66 threads is an odd number to settle on. Must have barely missed mandatory performance targets with 64.
    Reply
  • NeoMorpheus
    Kamen Rider Blade said:
    Also, a "Custom RISC" architecture vs a derivative off of x86, hmmm.
    And you can bet that the number one "feature" would be the IP not accessible to AMD, hence they finally found a way to kill their x86 license agreement.

    Itanium lives once more!
    Reply
  • Eximo
    Intel's best process nodes are busy churning out Intel x86 chips for the consumer computer market or doing development directly related to it. Makes so sense to interrupt their production to make a demo chip. They probably also have some spare TSMC fab time allotted.
    Reply
  • dehjomz
    So what OS/software can this custom chip run? Also, is Intel signaling the end of x86 and the dawn of some new RISC-based architecture ?
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    InvalidError said:
    If you are going to build an application-specific (graph analysis) CPU with 66 hardware threads per core, you likely don't want a complex instruction decoder bottlenecking the whole thing and adding a handful of cycles latency penalty to every branch prediction miss and every hardware thread switch.

    Kind of a similar story to CPU vs GPU cores.

    66 threads is an odd number to settle on. Must have barely missed mandatory performance targets with 64.
    They couldn't have killed 2x threads per core and added in 2x more cores for 10x core?
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    NeoMorpheus said:
    And you can bet that the number one "feature" would be the IP not accessible to AMD, hence they finally found a way to kill their x86 license agreement.

    Itanium lives once more!
    May the "Itanium 2" sink like the original "Itanic!"
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    dehjomz said:
    So what OS/software can this custom chip run? Also, is Intel signaling the end of x86 and the dawn of some new RISC-based architecture ?
    There are plenty of Linux variants out there that can run on RISC-V and other RISC variants. My guess would be a fork of one of those variants with updated kernels to handle the custom instructions. I also wouldn't be surprised if Intel's "custom"-RISC instructions where forked from another source.
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    dehjomz said:
    So what OS/software can this custom chip run? Also, is Intel signaling the end of x86 and the dawn of some new RISC-based architecture ?
    Since it is basically a tech-demo for graph analytics and on-package photonics, it may very well be running some sort of bare-bones micro-kernel just to coordinate compute and IO scheduling across nodes and with the host system/OS.

    The way I read it, these things are fundamentally meshed memory controllers with distributed compute capabilities, not stand-alone devices.
    Reply
  • NeoMorpheus
    Kamen Rider Blade said:
    May the "Itanium 2" sink like the original "Itanic!"
    Fingers crossed that it takes intel with it! :-)
    Reply